On 9/21/10 13:05 , Cédric Beust ♔ wrote:
Yup, interesting post.
I agree with Stephen on most points except the checked exceptions part
(I posted this as a comment on his blog but JRoller sucks rocks so my
comment disappeared. Why is anyone still using this prehistoric
software?).
Calling checked exceptions a "failed experiment" is a bit naive, and
using Spring as an illustration of this is pretty ironic. If anything,
Spring showed that using 100% runtime exceptions is as bad as using 0%.
I use Spring on a daily basis and I spend an enormous amount of time
going through pages and pages of logs containing endless stack traces
of runtime exceptions, all more useless than the next. I contend that
if it was possible to use checked exceptions judiciously, most of
these errors could have been caught at compile time.
Again I agree with Cédric about checked exceptions. It's a matter of
judicious use and then it becomes a valuable tool. I must say I've my
own idioms that depend pretty much on checked exceptions and their lack
on the next big language would be a significant reason to stay away from
it. Not that this worries me really: the next big language is still
vaporware and will be for many years... :-)
--
Fabrizio Giudici - Java Architect, Project Manager
Tidalwave s.a.s. - "We make Java work. Everywhere."
java.net/blog/fabriziogiudici - www.tidalwave.it/people
[email protected]
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java
Posse" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
